southsideirish

Brian Roberts from Baltimore and Carl Crawford from Tampa Bay. What would it take to get either of them? Is it possible to get either? These are the only players that I believe would really make a difference for us in the leadoff spot. They get on base, steal bases, and score runs. What would it take to get a deal for either of them done?

The always-reputable Tim Kurkjian continues to report that the Nationals and White Sox are in the midst of serious talks about Soriano. But in the 24 hours and change since this deal was characterized as "extremely close," all the evidence has suggested that these two teams aren't anywhere near the verge of a deal. Washington GM Jim Bowden has told other bidders, for instance, that they aren't close enough for him to stop taking other offers. In fact, he's still inviting those teams to send in those offers. So if Monday's news was leaked by somebody just for effect, it may turn out that the real effect was simply to spread more confusion and skepticism about what the heck is going on here. "In a few days," said an official of one interested club, "people won't buy the rumors anymore. It's going to be hard to believe anything is 'extremely close' if nothing has gotten done. I'm not sure exactly what's going on anymore. But clearly, this wasn't 'extremely close.'" And if neither pitcher Brandon McCarthy nor blue-chip third-base prospect Josh Fields is going to be in the deal, as White Sox GM Kenny Williams has now said emphatically, it can't be too close -- because the two GMs have a lot to haggle over. "There are no other guys in that [Chicago] system who can rise to the level of prospect that Bowden wants," said one AL executive. "They've got [pitcher] Lance Broadway, who's a good prospect, and [outfielder] Ryan Sweeney, who's a decent prospect but not an elite prospect. And [pitcher] Ray Liotta is a decent prospect. So I guess you could structure a deal for those three. But it would surprise me if that's the kind of deal Jim would make on July 25. That's the kind of deal you make when you don't have anything else on Sunday." Which might be the way this thing ultimately works out. This might just be a fallback for both teams if nothing bigger or better turns up by the weekend. And in the meantime, it might inspire some other bidder -- especially another AL power like the Tigers, Twins or White Sox -- to overpay for Soriano. So don't touch that clicker.

That is one year. His career OBP is only .346. Who cares about his rookie year. So, it is ENTIRELY true. I agree he did a good job at seeing more pitches last year, but this year? NO! Last year he did a great job at seeing more pitches and being a leadoff hitter. I don't see him doing that this year. You are getting a better average, about the same OBP, and only 4 less stolen bases. How does Podsednik possibly become the better leadoff hitter? The only categories that Pods ihas a higher number than Soriano in is triples and caught steals. That is it. There is no way that Pods has better numbers that Soriano that make him more suitable to leadoff. Your only argument is that Soriano is a great power hitter so we have to take advantage of that, however that does not make him any less suitable to hit leadoff than Pods. That is just ridiculous.

QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 08:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That's my entire point, it was my main reason that I don't think he fits on the Sox all that well. We're taking a semi-credible leadoff man out of the lineup and replacing him with an impatient slugger. How is Pods any more credible of a leadoff man than Soriano? Because is career OBP is .017 points higher?

QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 08:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> 1) That's my problem. We wouldn't really have a solid leadoff option. Ideally I'd like to see our leadoff guy over a .370 OBP. If I had to pick someone off the roster, I'd say Iguchi, but he doesn't thrill me either. 2) I posted the stats a while ago, he wasn't exactly bad in the 3 and 5 spots in Texas, even with weaker protection than he had in New York. He posted a .838 OPS in the 5 hole in 2005, which just above his career average. He actually struggled more in the leadoff spot in Texas. This year is a significant statistical outlier in his entire career. He's never been over .880 even when he was leading off for the Yankees. He's walking a lot more while still showing good power. I'd chalk this up to a Beltran/Beltre like contract year upswing than anything having to do with his spot in the lineup. But Podsednik is not even close to .370 OBP and never has been, so what is the freaking difference? The only difference I see is we are getting more HRs and RBIs with a better BA than we already have at the leadoff spot.

QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 07:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And Soriano's career OBP is .325. I'd call that a passable on base guy compared to a lower on base guy. This is the first year Soriano has gotten on base at a decent clip. Plus, Pods doesn't have the ability to hit for power and drive in runs like Soriano, so he almost has to lead off or hit 8 or 9. As a hitter, I'd say he's an upgrade. However, I don't really want him leading off because it's a waste of his best assets. He's much more dangerous as an RBI producer than a run scorer. I've said that several times. I already said Soriano's career OBP is .325. It is not that far off of Pods' career OBP, which is not a high one. I disagree with your assessment. I think he fits the White Sox lineup much better in the leadoff spot than he does anywhere else. We would have absolutely no one else to put in leadoff anyway. So I don't know what you are thinking from that standpoint. If Soriano doesn't leadoff, then who does? Anderson? Iguchi? Uribe? I just don't get it.

QUOTE(S720 @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 07:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I am not talking about his defensive skill. His defense is great. The notion that he has been a big reason why we have won is IMHO bogus! Please tell me how many games that he has won for us using his defensive skills, and how many games he has cost us due to his offensive deficiency in the first half? I like BA as our CF, much better than Rowand. But please stop the cherry picking. Cherry picking? I'm not following here. How many runs has his offensive deficiency cost us in the first half? I have no idea. We are the highest scoring team in the league and you are worried about how many runs his offensive deficiency cost us up to June 11th? Wierd. I don't know how many runs his defensive skills have saved us either. Maybe you can look up both these stats somewhere and let us all know when you find out. That would be grrrreeeaaatt.

QUOTE(S720 @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 06:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I second that! BA has been an offensive disappointment. Period! Not since June 11. He has also saved this team many runs with his play in CF. He has been a big reason why we have won. Plus he is only going to get better.

QUOTE(sircaffey @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 06:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Jenks was in so much trouble he got released. Sox developed him into what he is today, no doubt. He has always had the talent, but the Sox helped him put it together. What kind of trouble? Please explain. If you mean the drinking trouble then I wouldn't call that development. I would call that Jenks getting scared that his baseball career may be over so he better shape up. QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 06:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'd consider Cotts a White Sox development - he was pitching in high-A for the Athletics when he was traded. He then pitched marvelously in AA for a little over half a year, was called up, and hasn't really seen the minors since then. Jenks was a complete reclamation project by the White Sox. Give credit to the Angels for drafting the kid, but that's about all you can give them credit for. They let him go, the Sox picked him up, put him in the pen, and the rest is history. Garland was traded by the Cubs to the Sox as an 18 year old in A-ball. If that isn't the Sox own development, I don't know what is. Maybe this is me butting in on the wrong conversation, but a .351 OBP last year, and a .349 OBP this year isn't high, but it's adequate. His baserunning and defense leave something to be desired, but he can get on base. So can Soriano. Pods = a career .346 OBP, not exactly a high on base guy. Soriano is not that big of a difference at a career .325 OBP. I am just not understanding why Zoom thinks we are replacing this supposedly HIGH ON BASE GUY with a LOW ON BASE GUY. They are pretty similar with all of the other stats going Soriano's way. Plus he has busted his tail to learn how to play left field. Pods still has trouble playing LF and he is a career outfielder. Soriano is a huge upgrade.

QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 04:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> We don't have one if we get Soriano and Pods gets squeezed out of the lineup, which is my whole point. Hell, I'd rather have Iguchi lead off in that situation, but that isn't great either. Soriano's OBP is about 65 points higher with men on, and his slugging is almost 100 points higher. Because of that, I'd rather not have him as our leadoff hitter. Since when is Pods a high OBP guy? You are confusing to talk to.

QUOTE(daa84 @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 04:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> im pretty sure all 4 of those names were crucial in winning us a world series and also pretty sure that 3 of them have been allstars.....id say thats a good job at developing some pitchers I'm really not convinced that you can say we developed Cotts or Jenks. They came from other organizations that developed them. Even Garland to an extent.

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 02:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ...suggested trading Joe Crede to Washington in a potential Soriano deal because "this young kid Josh Fields is ready to play." Has anyone seen Fields' bat-speed? Joe Crede is hopefully going to be a White Sox lifer, and Josh Fields is clearly not ready to play the hot corner for a championship-caliber (hopefully.) Plus, think before you speak Sean... the Nats have Ryan Zimmerman, a 24 year old kid who kills the ball playing 3rd base for them. Field would obviously have to play LF with them, not 3rd. Salisbury's comments don't surprise me. He doesn't seem to ever hear or get the full story. Yesterday he was blasting the Sox for going to the media with the Widger stuff. He said that the Sox should have told Widger the stuff behind closed doors to his face and not to the media. Then once Widger has that information he can do what he wants with it. If he wants to share it with the media he can, if not then he doesn't. Ummm, Sean, that is exactly the way it happened. I have stopped taking anything Salisbury says seriously. He never gets the story straight or gets all of the information before he speaks his opinion.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 04:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And yet we've developed SP's like Brandon McCarthy who have shown they can successful at the major league level. And other SP's in our system like Gonzalez, Haigwood and Lumsden have brought us back Jim Thome and Mike MacDougall. You can't just draft a power pitcher and expect him to develop into a #1 or #2 caliber starter like that. Look at Adam Miller in the Indians organization, and how highly he was rated 2 seasons ago, compared to where he is now. We have? Brandon McCarthy is not really developed yet. We can't really say for sure what we have with him. We have only really developed Garland, Buehrle, Cotts, and maybe Jenks if you consider us developing him or not I don't know. We have nothing in developing pitching in the majors on other teams. I guess Kip Wells and Josh Fogg are it. We are not a very good system for developing our own pitchers. We usually have more busts than quality ptichers. QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 05:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't really see that as the case. I'd rather have him being a major power threat at like 5 or 6 with our big OBP guys on base already instead of depending on Uribe and Anderson to get on in front of them, or possibly #2. He has more value driving runs in than getting on base in front of other big sticks. Seriously, this is the first year that he has ever cracked 40 walks, and he's never finished the year batting over .300. IMO he's really miscast as a leadoff hitter and people keep putting him there because he can run. The leadoff spot really seems like a waste of his best traits. I don't really like the idea of having a guy that hits 28 homers in an off year leading off. His OBP and impatience aren't really an issue lower in the order as well. Who are our big OBP guys that will be leading off? I don't get it.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 04:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Are you ignoring the reason Delgado rejected the trade? It kind of ruins your ridiculous argument. What is my argument again? That the Sox would have signed Delgado long term if in fact he did accept the trade here? The Sox were not only interested in him being a rent a player? Was that my argument?

QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 04:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> How could he not hit anywhere else? With his power he can easily hit in the middle of the order. He's pretty much lead off every year, so that'd be true by default. It still mystifies me why people insist on batting him leadoff. He doesn't get on base nearly enough and doesn't see very many pitches. If we needed a middle of the order bat that'd be one thing, but unless we can get him for only prospects acquiring doesn't make sense to me. He is a true leadoff hitter. He is better than Podsednik at leading off. If we acquire him, who would bat leadoff? He is not a middle of the order hitter. He is best when batting leadoff, so why move him? And he is not pretty much a leadoff hitter every year. In Texas he was batting 3rd and 5th a lot. I would bet just as much or pretty close to as much as he did leadoff.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 04:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I still remember Hawk talking a couple of years ago, raving about all the guys in the system that threw 95. Where are they? I not up for arguing with you, you're being absurd. But remember the Sox weren't selling out and wouldn't have been able to afford Delgado at that time. Again assumptions about what the Sox could and could not afford and what moves they would and would not have made to be able to afford Delgado.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 04:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I still remember Hawk talking a couple of years ago, raving about all the guys in the system that threw 95. Where are they? I not up for arguing with you, you're being absurd. Yeah, your'e right. You can't defend it, so I am absurd. Correct!

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 04:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> He would have been a rental, you're assuming things. Frank Thomas was hurt in 2004 and the DH, and Konerko plays 1B. He was coming in in 2004 to take over at DH when Frank was hurt, but refused because of his no trade. Frank was signed for 2005, and Everett was back on the team already too. You're the one assuming, and not doing a very good job at it. I suppose they couldn't do anything with Frank or Everett then and keep Delgado (the better player). Why would you assume that they couldn't or wouldn't? Proceed.

QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 04:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> He's not really a leadoff hitter though. He's having a monster year and his OBP still isn't much higher than Pods. His career OBP is a pathetic .325. It's like .360 this year, but I'd attribute a lot of that to teams pitching around him (his OBP is .338 with no one on, .400 with runners on, despite a virtually identical BA). Just because he can run doesn't mean he's a good leadoff hitter. He displays very little discipline at the plate. He is definitely a leadoff hitter. His best years have always been batting leadoff. He can't hit anywhere else. Think what you want, but he is a leadoff hitter and he would come here to do just that.

QUOTE(Jordan4life_2006 @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 04:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah, I've heard of it. So what makes people so sure the Nats would want to stick a guy in left who's been a 3rd baseman his entire baseball career? Why not? The Sox would have to do the same thing. He is a very good athlete that can easily make that position change. Carlos Lee did it and he is not half the athlete Josh Fields is.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 03:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Everett, RAlomar, wanted Delgado, even Blum was a rental. Delgado would have been a rental? How do you know this for a fact? Don't assume things. Everett, Alomar, and Blum? You are totally right. You got me there. They were great players that we gave up top notch prospects for with the intention of keeping around for years to come. My bad.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 03:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah, our bullpen has really been killing us lately. That damn Bobby Jenks can't be trusted. BTW, Flash Gordon has been brutal for the Phillies lately. Our bullpen is fine....I just wish Ozzie trust them as much as our underachieving starters. Did he mention Fields or Broadway not going anyway. Get back to me when he does and I will consider this deal dead. Thank you.

QUOTE(southsideirish @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 03:52 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> He would bat leadoff, not middle of the order. We have enough in the middle of the order with Thome, Konerko, Dye, Pierzynski, and Crede. Who says it would be for 3 months? I can't remember KW ever getting a player for only a rental with no intentions of signing him. Why would he start now? It just isn't his style. I believe if we trade for him and give up top prospects then KW will have some kind of deal set in place with Soriano.

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 03:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Soriano is exactly what we dont need right now. Sure its fun to have the power in the middle of the line up, but we need bullpen help bad more then anything. If Vas can only go 5 innings, let him and bring in someone else. Soriano wouldnt be an upgrade on defense either. He would bat leadoff, not middle of the order. We have enough in the middle of the order with Thome, Konerko, Dye, Pierzynski, and Crede.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Jul 25, 2006 -> 12:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Any link to report 2? Soriano trade rumors